Archive for: February 2014

Who is the real prophet of doom?

By: Dr. Deng Bol Kuol, KENYA, FEB/04/2014, SSN;

The unfolding truth behind the tragic events, which erupted in Juba on 15th December 2013, is gradually becoming clearer and clearer. As it is reported by reliable sources those terrible events were triggered by a clash between the soldiers of the Presidential Guard, when their commander (a Dinka) decided to disarm the whole force and rearm a group of Dinka soldiers at that night.

This story indicates beyond reasonable doubts that it was the Dinka soldiers among the presidential guards who had a mysterious plan and the Nuer soldiers were only reacting to their suspicious activities.

With these revelations, the people of South of Sudan and many of their friends in the world have discovered and realized that the alleged coup was nothing but a premeditated ploy orchestrated by President Salva kiir and his group to eliminate Dr. Riek Machar and the other political opponents.

In this respect, if we want to verify the real coup plotters, let us compare the demeanour of the exuberant Gen. Salva Kiir in the press conference of 15/12/2013 and the depressed Gen. Salva Kiir in the other appearances after he learned that Dr. Riek Machar has escaped safely from the plot of his assassination.

Who would have imagined that President Salva Kiir would be intoxicated by power and greed to the extent of planning to kill his own comrades? What a horrible disgrace?

Miraculously, on that terrible night, our Almighty God sent his angels to rescue Dr. Riek Machar and his companions from the devil and the demons in Juba (the word angels here refers to the unknown heroes, who bravely succeeded to take Dr. Riek Machar out from Juba safely).

This miracle is a sign that Dr. Riek Machar Teny is a prophet of hope, who will save our new country and change it into a democratic place of freedom, equality, justice and prosperity.

At this juncture, it is imperative to throw one question to Mr. Michael Makuei (ElSahaf of South Sudan) and those people who are vehemently defending Gen. Salva Kiir as a democratically elected president: The simple question for the pretenders in Juba will be: Is fabricating a coup to kill political opponents a constitutional democratic right?

The answer is definitely a big ‘No’. In fact, such action is an act of high treason, which strips the constitutional legitimacy from any elected president. In this context, President Salva kiir is a cruel dictator, who is supposed to be impeached by the Parliament.

Ironically, the terrified chickens of the rubber-stamp Parliament welcomed the brutal tyrant with a standing ovation, when he addressed them in the aftermath of the fabricated coup!

Also, to add insult to injury, President Salva Kiir did not show little sympathy or sorrow to those honorable members of the Parliament, who might have lost their loved ones in the massacre of Juba.

Instead, he accused some members of the Parliament of being part of the coup and insulted our brave mother Rebecca Nyandeng. Yet, supporters of the paranoid dictator were clapping!

Of Course, some of our honourable members are not cowards, but in the domain of a dictator, people are usually squeezed between the rock and the hard place. They have to make the difficult choice to either join the team of sycophants and opportunists or risk being labelled enemies.

It boggles one’s mind that the senseless liars in Juba, namely Gen. Salva Kiir, Mr. Wani Igga, Mr. Martin Elia, Mr. Kual Manyang, Mr. Michael Makuei, Mr. Riak Gai, Mr. Bashir Bandi, Mr. Barnaba Mariel and others, are still unscrupulously spreading lies to deceive the people of South Sudan about the real coup plotters.

However, the dictator and his group ought to be told that sooner or later truth will eventually prevail, because people of South Sudan and their friends in the international community are not fools.

One example is the statement by Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the crisis in South Sudan, when she officially stated: “We have not seen any evidence that there was a coup attempt”.

Hence, it is hypocritical for Gen. Salva Kiir and his group to continue defying the regional and international mounting pressure to release the innocent political detainees since there was no coup attempt.

In the same manner, the desperate action by Gen. Salva Kiir and his group to implicate and prosecute innocent political detainees will constitute another crime against humanity and may undermine the regional and international efforts to solve the crisis through peaceful negotiations.

Certainly, Dr. Riak Machar is absolutely justified to insist on his demand for the release of the political detainees before signing any cease fire agreement, because President Salva Kiir and his group are murderers, who cannot be trusted.

Furthermore, it is ridiculous for Mr. Ateny Wek Ateny to continue “beating the drums of lies” about the alleged coup and the genocide, because the President himself has explicitly confessed the atrocities, which were committed in Juba by the Dinka presidential guards, when he said: “Anybody that goes to residential areas to kill people or to loot the property of others and hoping that he’s doing it to support me must know that person is not supporting me. Instead, you are destroying me”.

All in all, President Salva Kiir and his group should be made responsible and accountable for fabricating the coup and for the heinous crimes, which were committed by the soldiers in Juba and everywhere in South Sudan. This argument can be substantiated by the following points:

First, Gen. Salva Kiir started his dubious plans to maintain the political and economic power through tribalism and Dinka hegemony by looting millions of dollars from the coppers of the Government of South Sudan.

Examples of the looting include the Dura Saga, the loan of 4.5 billion Dollars during the austerity measures and the four billion American Dollars, which were allegedly stolen by 75 government officials.

According to the letters written by President kiir to the officials; this amount is currently being refunded to a secret account known by President Kiir and one of his friends.

Second, President Salva Kiir formed his tribal army (predominantly from the Dinka of Warrap and Aweil) under the disguise of the presidential guards to strengthen his military grip and terrify his political adversaries.

It is also obvious that the Militias were armed and sent by Khartoum to support President Salva Kiir in his secret military plans.

Third, President Salva Kiir was the one who designed and declared the current ethnic war in South Sudan, when he announced that the alleged coup was led by Dr. Riek Machar.

This announcement was an order to unleash his tribal militia (the so-called presidential guards) on the suspected enemies.

As a result, Dinka Soldiers went on rampage in Juba wreaking havoc and targeting Nuer people from door to door. This carnage is a genocide and ethnic cleansing by all measures in the world of the 21st century.

In this regard, it is hypocrisy that President Salva Kiir was reported saying: ‘I will not release the political detainees; unless I am told who would be held responsible for the atrocities committed against the people’.

This statement is a continuation of the denial campaign, which reveals that Gen. Salva Kiir and his group are still daydreaming about their blame game and deception propaganda.

However, the great people of South Sudan know very well that Dr. Riek Machar, Mr. Pagan Amum, Mama Rebecca Nyandeng, Mr. Deng Alor, Mr. Kosti Manibe, Justice John Luk, Gen. Oyay Deng Ajak, Mr. Gier Chuang, Mr. Taban Deng, Dr. Cirilo Utang, Dr. Adwok Nyaba, Mr. Lado Gore, Eng. Tong Mayay, Mr. Biar Dut, Dr. Majak Agoth, Amb. Ezikel Gatkuoth and others are falsely accused by Gen. Kiir, because they courageously rejected his dictatorial decisions and tendencies.

As a result, it seems that these heroes and heroines are once again destined by their patriotic and national spirit, which was driving them during the liberation struggle to lead the war of freedom and democracy in our beloved land South Sudan.

Now, who is the real prophet of doom in the Republic of South Sudan? This question does not need someone to be a rocket scientist to answer it.

In a nutshell, President Salva Kiir is the real prophet of doom in South Sudan. He has categorically abused his constitutional powers, when he decided to rule by autocratic decrees and not by democratic norms.

He has betrayed the SPLM Party and the people of South Sudan, when he misused the people’s trust to commit genocide and plunge our new country into a disastrous ethnic war.

Therefore, the right place for Gen. Salva Kiir will be the prison of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in Hague and not the Presidential Palace in Juba.

In other words, the new African dictator Gen. Salva Kiir has unconsciously opened the Pandora Box to book his seat near his friend and mentor the ICC fugitive Omer El Bashir.

Dr. Deng Bol Kuol is a concerned South Sudanese. He can be reached through

Univ. of Juba Nuer Students Open Letter: Nuer students at risk

To: Hon. Robert Deng, Deanship of Students

University of Juba
Date:03/02/2014. SSN;

With deep sorrow let us, first and foremost pay condolence messages to the respective families of our all Nuer students of Juba University who have lost their dear lives as a result of Juba incidence of Dec, 2013 to Jan. 2014 against the Nuer. The Massacre which was started in Juba dated 15th -20th Dec, 2013.

Those colleagues and brothers, the Nuer Students of Juba University encountered their unnatural deaths and intentionally killed by special forces, after they had been identified through their ethnic evidences as well as (University IDs) were found.

Therefore, what we can assure/tell these hearts-broken families is to just endure the painfulness of having lost those young men (without offspring) in comfort and God’s name.

It has never been cowardice for unarmed University students to be killed in a way they were murdered by armed security personnel.

However, we cannot discourage any Nuer to stop telling the truth of being a Nuer whatsoever the case may be.

Additionally, the Almighty God isn’t blamed for having created a Nuer as one of ethnic groups in South Sudan.

Dear Sir, We, the Nuer students in the University are well aware that University of Juba (UoJ), according to its calendar, had already started Lectures by its all Colleges— so we were in the middle of our studies when Juba Incidence happened on 15 Dec, last year.

Which means, all Colleges or some (Colleges) students would have been finished and in their final Examinations this time.

But because of those interruptions the University was automatically/indefinitely closed.

Nevertheless, we can acknowledge that the studies or Lectures, course works are being resumed and examinations are approaching.

Simultaneously, we the Nuer students in University of Juba (UoJ) were to be ready for lectures in January/February, 2014.

But, unfortunately, as we tried/prepared ourselves to do that, we could only feel the situation wasn’t/isn’t conducive for us to attend lectures, because the same problem which has taken the lives of our colleagues and brothers is still increasingly facing us.

Hon. Dean,

To make matter worse, on Saturday (last week) 1st February, 2014, we have unexpectedly lost two of our students who were just on their way to the University premises, as they were going to check and attend their lectures.

They were stopped by security personnel at the roadside, who asked them to see their IDs. When they presented their IDs to the personnel, written clearly “the property of Juba University and must be shown on demand”; they were immediately captured, pushed/snatched into a car- double Cabin and taken to unknown destination where they might have been finally killed.

They haven’t returned up to now. For this very fatal reason, we would like to bring this problem into your attention that our lives are still in danger, Mr. Deanship of students.

Therefore, we won’t be able to attend lectures or go for examinations during this crisis which has engulfed our country.

We have, therefore unanimously, decided to hide for or in part protect our lives.

A dead person cannot do anything but a live person, as long as he/she is alive can do everything in the future, including University studies.

Alternatively, we need the University Administration to put into consideration our up to date status.

We cannot forget to admire the University of Juba‘s Administration, all Lecturers and Professors for the remarkable management and cooperative behavior—services we were receiving while in the University.

And a special thank and appreciation goes to Deputy Dean of Students, Dr. Adam Sholong for the great concern he shown to us in this trying time/situation we are forced to, by visited us and worries so much about our lives following the incidences.

So Dr. Sholong, you are indeed one of the leaders South Sudan needs the most and we will never forget the good thing that you have done to us.

Moreover, all our colleagues and students from different origins in University of Juba are hereby informed that what had happened is indeed contrary to our inter-cultural, intellectual and academic life in the University and in South Sudan as a whole.

Only the Republic of South Sudan Government has all prerogatives powers to decide what it had decided. This shouldn’t either hurt our intellectual life or relations.

It had something to do with politicians as we could think all of us, a Political Party’s issue, but to our great surprise everything becomes and ends up against a certain ethnic group, the Nuer, which we belong.

Of course, there is no way for us to avoid all that ethnic identities.

Hence, we are just trying to evade a direct death. That is why we’re now bringing up this problem of ours before the Deanship of Students and University of Juba’s Administration for further consideration.

We will be looking forward for your positive response.

Sincerely Yours

N.B this letter is not stamped because all our Association properties including, the seal of Association had been destroyed and burned in the Incidence.

Cc. UoJ’s Vice Chancellor

Cc. Principal


Why the SPLM must be peacefully dissolved

A peaceful and sustainable path to define the future of South Sudan nation-building process.

BY: Mr. Natale Nuer Kuot A. Rehan, FEB/03/2014, SSN;

Let’s start by stating that the current political turmoil despite its horrific and abysmal manifestations and outcomes, provides unprecedented opportunities for South Sudanese to rethink the off-track and faltered nation-building process under the leadership of the current ruling party-SPLM (both governing and opposition groups) and to revisit the mistakenly conceived, long-held and ready-made assumption that the very existence of South Sudan as a viable state is inextricably dependent on existence of SPLM despite its evidently failing dysfunctional structures, as it’s ruling party.

Well, it is needless to say that the current senseless and brutal infighting and other similar past bloody inter-ethnic fighting throughout the south Sudanese struggle discourse refuted these incessant calls that the remedy inevitably lies in transformation and reform of the ruling party and its Siamese twins the military wing-SPLA.

Perhaps, it is a high time to comprehensively rethink the root causes of recurring South-South crisis and radically counter-propose a rather brave and patriotic choice which summarizes in genuine call for a peaceful and voluntarily dissolution of SPLM- a multi-faceted broad-based coalition that has successfully led a militaristic rebellion against the consecutive regimes in Khartoum and finally achieved the peaceful independence of South Sudan through referendum held in July 2011 via well-attended popular referendum.

In their tireless efforts to illuminate the dark-tunnelled, tragic situation that has recently plagued South Sudan, the 2 and 1/2 years old world newest country, many views and opinionated analysis of the problem have been offered by a lot of reputable analysts and policy-making research institutions locally and internationally.

Most of these pundits referred the country’s current bloody violence- which is not a stand-alone conflict- to failures of south Sudanese elites and in particular the militaristic elites of the ruling party (SPLM) to transform the party from a militaristic liberation movement into civil Democratic Party with a clear social responsibility agenda to lead the nation building process.

And they therefore concluded their analytical efforts and undertakings on the country crisis with a business-as-usual suggestions and repetitive endless call for the transformation of both the SPLM and it’s military wing the SPLA into professional institutions in their respective realms, which has always constituted a failed task as it has been evidently manifested in the current inhumane and brutal violence that will add another burden and agony on the elite-betrayed south Sudanese populace.

The current South Sudan crisis has three interdependent parameters-a political power struggle over the ruling party leadership; that was automatically echoed within the ranks and files of SPLA, the ruling party military wing constitutionally turned into a national Armed forces but hardly undergone any authentic integration to transform it from just summation and coalition of former militias lacking any national ethos except their allegiances to their former leaders or ethnicities who were historically grouped together under rhetoric of common external oppression threats.

Consequentially those infightings within the army become quickly overtoned by ethnicities threatening to throw the whole country into ethnic war.

The current political crisis within the SPLM evolved when a numbers of key seniors members of SPLM expressed their interest to replace (in case of Former party secretary-general & current VP- James W. Igga) or challenge (in case of former VP & Madam Rabecca- Garang’s window) the current Chairperson of the party, Lt. General Salva Kiir after he has privately disclosed to his local inner circles and international allies his disinterest to run for another term.

Since that moment, things were not the same again within the SPLM, and the political disputes started rolling up and building momentum like a rolling snowball, till it spilt over beyond the capacity of already dysfunctional institutions of SPLM that lacks any organized hierarchical decision-making process and become public with each group accusing the other of failing the Party and thus failing the aspirations of South Sudanese peoples.

Competing Leadership aspirations are natural, normal and healthy struggle provided they managed within well-institutionalized political parties and even considers as drivers of development and innovations that could positively bolster the affairs within the party to chart a better path for party evolution.

But these considered healthy political practices always, almost triggers a breakdown in the case of loosely managed party’s institution as with the SPLM- a rather broad Coalition of conflicting political ideologies with contradicting social agenda and interests that only could survive by external common threats and oppression.

It hard to avoid stating that South Sudanese struggle discourse historically led by SPLM/A and other revolutionary armed forces (Anya-Nya movements) is unlike other regional and international revolutionary movements who were developed as socio-political movements throughout struggle discourse and eventually created its Military wings to accelerate the attainment of its socio-economic objectives.

The SPLM/A as well as its predecessor (Anya Nya military movements) on other hand started as Military movement lacking any social change agenda except the undefined broad rhetoric of Marginalization, oppression and the loose call for equitable new Sudan; and had developed its political wing during its struggle discourse.

That upside-down logic of putting- the horse- behind -the cart in its establishment and evolution explained many consequential damages that has cripple down the functionality of SPLM/A and thus rendered futile all the transformation attempts so far.

During its early military struggle to frustrate the attempts of consecutive Khartoum regimes to govern the country, the SPLA relied on mobilization, and recruitment of myriad south Sudanese ethnicities and races and later on other Marginalized group and united them to fought the liberation war.

With its immature organizations and feeble institution, this ethnicity-based mobilization has unconsciously let to ethnicization of power sharing within the SPLA and it’s political wing the SPLM.

Been a loosely knitted coalition of politicized ethnicities- represented always by individuals with conflicting interests and visions-within the SPLM structures is responsible for dysfunctionality of movement as cohesive party and its Inability to peacefully manage any disputes -always power struggle-within its various institutional levels.

It is therefore understandable, that given the weaken party organs and ill-institutionalized power relations with the SPLM any conflicting interest and political dispute quickly degenerate into violent ethnic crisis at grassroots level as it is evidently illustrated by the current tragic crisis and other historical similar crisis during south Sudanese struggle discourse under SPLM/A umbrella.

It is ironically evident that the casualties in South Sudanese’s life and properties both in terms of numbers and gravity is more devastating with South-South crisis than it was with North-South crisis and this itself is categorically blamed on the failure of politico-militarist elites of South Sudan who lack any social agenda to socially and economically transformed the masses from ethnic and tribal entities into citizens.

It seemingly evident throughout the tragic history of south Sudanese struggle and particularly when it come to domestic dispute, the highest prices is always paid by innocent civilians specifically, women, children, and elderly population whom are ironically rewarded less when the militarily power struggle is peacefully settled on negotiation table as it happened in Addis Ababa 1972, Khartoum peace agreement of 1997, and finally the Naivasha 2005.

All these power deal-making agreements brokered by international communities ended up with south Sudanese politico-militarist elites been rewarded with highest political and military posts in various state institutions and almost zero dividend to south Sudanese masses whom suffered most and got nothing in term development projects at least to change their mode of living to better or at lest acceptable humane scale.

This galling manifestation proved the state of alienation that characterize the relations between south Sudanese masses interest and its elites interests.

Ironically this the same characteristic that define their northern Sudanese counterparts who replace the colonial authority in running the Sudanese state affairs pursuing theirs own interests and ignores the needs of various Sudanese citizens and communities and thus exploiting the masses even worse than the colonial powers that they replace. The result was the fragmentation of the country.

With the current crisis in South Sudan and the horrible trajectories that it has already taken, one wonders; whether South Sudanese politico- militarist elites lack capacities to learn from their own history in that political disputes were never and will never be resolved militarily; disputes, as it their own power struggle history tells, always have to be resolved on negotiations table.

Or whether these elites interests as it is evidently clear- are totally aliens to those of south Sudanese masses whom the only appeal to, during their power struggle and forgotten during dividend distribution.

As they warring parties to the conflict still dragging their feet in Addis Ababa to commit itself to peaceful settlement in anticipation of gaining any militarily victory on the battlefield based on illusionary-business-as-usual miscalculation that it will provide them with a leverage on the negotiation table, highest prices are continuing been paid by the innocent south Sudanese masses in terms of wasted lives, destroyed properties and means of living, and hijacked futures for their loving little ones.

Still it is so hard to escape the logical question: what is all this senseless war for? Is it just an internal power struggle within the same party or there is something more to it that is causing the whole South Sudan masses to highly paid unnecessary prices?

I am inclined to believe that the problem lies with the politico-militarist elites of the ruling party who fell short to understand that nation-building process is rather different from a liberation war that was fought, during which they escaped any sort of social responsibility towards masses and they naively heavily relied on humanitarian relief organizations to shoulder the social needs of abandoned South Sudanese masses.

Nation building process is hard process that requires skills and knowledge rather than a blind and biased political loyalties; it needs differing political ideology and inclusive political organizations to harness that difference and direct it to common interest of the people.

Therefore the stubborn insistence of necessity of being in one politico-militaristic coalition like SPLM could be justifiable during the liberation course as the then objective and subjective conditions might have dictated, but that should not be the case during the nation building process which necessarily demand diversities in political ideologies and programs to enrich the development discourse that is badly needed in country that is rich and diverse in everything but it’s leading elites!!.

Reflecting on the current political crisis and its historical evolution within the ruling party, one can easily deduced that the Politico-militarist elites of the ruling party are kind of being trapped by the necessity and obligation of remaining within the SPLM especially after it’s historical achievement of South Sudan independence.

This is out of the fear of been easily labelled as traitor or betrayer among south Sudanese masses- as majority of them dearly and elusively count SPLM/A as vanguard movement through which the collectively attained their freedom from their former oppressor.

This was evidently experienced by those who defected from the movement in 1991 (I.e. Nasir, Fashoda , Bor & Bahr-el-Ghazel factions), they suffered a lot of political disgrace that has threaten to put an end to their political career had they didn’t make the hard choice of returning back to the main stream movement (Torit Faction).

It was as well the case with the recent defection made by Dr. Lam Akol when differed with some of influential senior elites. He insisted of keeping the same name SPLM with an annex D.C (Democratic Change) to differentiate it from the main one, which I do believe it to be a courageous decision whether agreeing or disagreeing with it.

The main reason behind that insistence on the SPLM name is the inner conviction by these leading elites of the contribution and sacrifices they made during the struggle discourse to make the SPLM/A as most cherished politico-militaristic organization on South Sudanese psyche which make hard to abandon it to any group to enjoyed its ready made political basis.

This same conclusion answers the question: Why don’t these conflicting political ideologies break up into different political organization and spare the lives of innocent civilians?

The answer lies with SPLM’s inextricable ties with the SPLA and prominent romance and support it enjoys among the majority of South Sudanese masses.

This heritage and leverage are the difficult and hardest choices to make; that it is preferably easier to fight within the SPLM than easily leave to any antagonistic group and to face a political wilderness as a result.

That could also explained the basis of appeal by then political rivals and now warring parties to each other that any discontented group could easily leave the SPLM if they are not satisfied with the state of affairs within it.

It was first initiated by President Kiir the Party’s chairperson during a public rally at Garang Mausoleum in Juba and repeated by Dr. Machar during his group press conference on Dec 6th, 2013 at SPLM house in Juba for the president group to leave the SPLM.

As the parties (still members of the same party SPLM) to the conflict are negotiating their differences in Addis Ababa under auspices of IGAD mediators, it is necessary to caution the parties to the conflict and regional and international mediators as well to avoid the business-as-usual compromised tactical solutions that only temporarily soothe the conflict and delayed its tragic manifestation of the crisis to later stage to only emerged heavily on even worst scale.

The two negotiating teams both the government and rebel needs to make the hard choices that will spare the life of innocent civilian- that is to negotiate beyond their narrow interest of power sharing shouldn’t now be the case when evidences of masses graves have filled up the country for unnecessary reasons.

One of these hard choices is to peaceful and voluntarily dissolve the ruling party SPLM and to spare it legacy as a collective historical liberation organization that have once in history united the diverse efforts of south Sudanese and other marginalization group of former Sudan irrespective of their creed, ethnicities, religion, and political ideologies, and not to commit any further atrocities under its name.

And finally, at least, to honor the memories of our fallen heroes who fearlessly and selflessly gave up their lives for the noble cause that the remaining loved ones will pursue their happiness in freedom and peace.

– Avoidances of reproducing the status quo stalled political impasse that has crippled nation-building process.
– Repulsion of a long-hold illusion by south Sudanese elites and theirs regional and international partners that the very existence of South Sudan as a state is intrinsically dependent on the existence of SPLM party as its ruling party until further notice!!!
-The origins of the current politico-militaristic crisis and the historical formation of the SPLM/A within the context of old Sudan political struggle since it’s independence in Jan. 1956.
-The irony of South Sudan situation is the choice between its very existence as a viable inclusive state and the existence of its vanguard movement the SPLM.
– Message to the negotiating parties, mediators, South Sudan elites and its regional and international partners to avoid tactical solutions that only deal with crisis symptoms and to embrace a strategic ones that will avoid this cyclical crisis occurrence.
– Conclusion

Is it a conspiracy to kill one ethnic group in South Sudan by Kiir & M7?

BY: Yien Lam, RSS, FEB/02/2014, SSN;

Immediately after the independence, president of South Sudan, Salva Kiir, differentiated himself with what the country was founded from and slipped into dictatorial way of governing in the newly nation by using degrees to eliminate whoever he does not want and announce the one he wants.

This became a wily tactic to deal with his opponents and a norm in south Sudan. Not only that, it eventually took the U-turn and started his nasty job of stealing 4.5 billion US dollars and signed military deal with M7 of Uganda. The deal was not known by southerners. It was done in secrecy till it revealed itself on December 15/2013 as to eliminate only one tribe in the country.

If that is the intention, as it has been witnessed on December 15, 16, and 17 and so forth, all doubts were erased by this delivered mass killing. Only nerdy folks are remaining ambivalent in this issue.

As the situation became chaotic as it is, Salva Kiir may be happy of killing innocent Nuers for the intention to eliminate them. But let me tell you this, Mr. President, you are not a God and will never be one to eliminate Nuers.

They were created like you and no human being has ever a right to eliminate them as you and your likes may have mistakenly been thinking of.

You were flatteringly wrong and you will bear the burden of what you already initiated even though you brought with you mercenaries to kill your own Country innocent people.

Mr. President, I bet you, it is better to live with them than killing them. In this case, President, wisdom must base on logic and rule of law not on the tribal line.

Because the president lacks logic as proved, innocent Nuers civilians would have not been killed by the president’s thugs. This tragic death happened because this president is unable to handle the country affairs. He does not even know how important the life of human being is.

He poorly thinks on the tribal line that was proved on the December 15, 16, and 17 evident. If it was not so, the innocent Nuers civilians would have not been executed simply because they were Nuers.

A rationalized president could not have done that at all. Only one who is preoccupied by the tribal ideology did it. In such a scenario, would that be a president of the country or tribal one?

As the things remain as such, Mr. President, it would be better to know what the president means than loving the name without doing its work.

It is a shame for you to allow another president from sovereign nation to command our own. This is an embarrassment not only to you but to all South Sudan as a nation because this will remain in the history of the country for ever.

Valuing the power than the country and its people is another important piece of the history. It may not be now. But will be the case in future because the country is now being run by an outsider.

For that reason, is south Sudan a province in Uganda or is it conspiracy by the government to compromise its sovereignty to M7 to kill its own people?

To answer the South Sudan question of being part of Uganda or not, has something to do with the fear of being ousted from the power as it seemed to be the case now.

Yes for now in my view, South Sudan seems to be part of Uganda in theory because everything militarily is being ran or guided by Ugandan soldiers. But remains to be seen practically.

Anyhow, this question will not quickly be erased as long as Kiir regime remains at large. It will remain so, unless Kiir regime is being pressured by outside forces. Otherwise, the mystery of it being a part of M7 country will remain as such for the days to come if not months.

I think this is the fact as the issue is being seen at the moment. It has been seen as such since the second anniversary of the south Sudan independent. Is there anyone that could deny these facts in South Sudan?

Believe it not, only those who shamelessly gave up the South Sudan sovereignty to foreigners that may stupidly say so. But I truly doubted what they may claim this time around because government dollars have been seen in action so far.

But will truly be regretted by the president and his sycophants whose aims is to destroy the country that we dearly love and produce only intransigence in terms of progress in the country issues.

In such uncompromising scenarios, how can the country progress if the president and his aids stubbornly refuse to accept ideas of others? Is intransigence only way forward for the country to prosper? Be the judge!

To me, it does not because country needs ideas of all kinds. But this is not the case in Kirr’s South Sudan. Coming up with different ideas is being translated as the threat in the country that we all love.

So, the supposed government job becomes one man show. That is why South Sudan is in turmoil now and continues to be so, as long as the leader of the country remains to be Kiir. There will be no change in any sector believe it or not.

When we come to the question of conspiracy in my view, this has a lot to do with power of the president of the country. Here is why: Kiir has been frustrated by the political opponents that he does not know how to get rid of.

Because of that reason, he decided to use a looted 4.5 Billion to eliminate his rival. In order to do that, he started compromising his Country sovereignty to the M7 in order to survive.

There would be no other legitimate reason for him to order his guards to intentionally kill innocent Nuers civilians than M7’s backing. The only one on the back of his mind at the time was rehearsal from his mentor to do so. If it was not so, Kiir would have not killed Innocent Nuers civilians. He did so because he knew that he has m7 on his side.

This is the only reason behind conspiracy. When you look at this, do you think this is a national president or tribal one? If he is the tribal as it seems to be, why would anyone from the people that he intentionally slaughters their love once still call him as such?

Is he deserving still to be called as such? To me, he deserves not my horror to call him as such because he proves it right that he is indeed a tribal leader by slaughtering his own people that he may rely on in supposed to be 2015 election in which I now doubted greatly.

Finally, in this situation, however, the world needs to take M7 issue in South Sudan as serious as it.

The author is concerned South Sudanese and can be reached by

The road to perfect peace or everlasting insurgency?

BY: Marial Mach Aduot Mach, Australia, FEB/02/2014, SSN;

Descending from a perpetual abyss of conflicts, the independent Republic of South Sudan was destined for peace, an absolute quintessence given its historical endurances of destructions and pogroms as the results of long-lasting wars with northern Sudan and among themselves.

Internal conflicts of armed insurgency, or rebellion as it can be gently referred to should have been characterised, or grouped in obsolescence. But let face it.

In her embryonic stages, South Sudan is a nation at war with itself. Insurgencies sprung up, and spread around the country almost uncontrolled, uprooting the already ill-nourished society, and shook unstable foundation of Juba’s toddling institution.

Ordinary people who suffer in perpetuity begun to question why us, the people who lost so much as the result of war even trying to prompt another?

Without wasting any time on analysis, or perhaps, on the rational reasoning, the false prophets, disgruntled masses which are acquired by the rage of self-seeking jumped to the conclusion, declaring oppression and other dispositional introspections, such as Dinkanisation of the government and other likes as the causes of rebellion.

As I adore the importance of opinions, I wouldn’t reject any kinds of conjectures made by Gen. Bapiny Monytuil, Johnson Uliny, David Yau Yau, and many others still in our bushes. Oppression and its offspring such as marginalization may be the case, depending on their own interpretations.

But with so much at stake, distilling a great debate out of the current political flattering and lethargy in Juba requires an intrepid, dauntless individuals, or a group of people whose their rationale surpasses the instituted marginal thinking current in Juba, steaming from irrational political propositions anchored on the tribal’s foundations, or influenced by the quest of riches offered by the government.

As an anxious victim of wars, it is with without any doubt that we need peace, but not at any cost, including the peace itself. A conflict wrecked civil populace wouldn’t appreciate my assertion, but I assume a critical examination of the current bonding between the president and armed groups will convinces others.

It is very real that our people need peace, but in order to have that peace, what sacrifices can we afford to put on the altar?

With such question in mind, His Lordship, the Archbishop of Anglican churches, and the current mediator in chief, Dr. Deng Bul who finds himself in the middle of artillery barrages trying to bring peace, would be quick to resort to a divinity theory regarding how Abraham offers his son Isaac to God to receive his blessing, thus, anything may go. But what is that anything, one may asked?

Gen. Salva Kiir, on the other hand would simply revert to his usual disposition; laying down a heroic red-carpet and ushering supposedly apostates and the turncoats.

While being applauded by the worshippers of doom, the paranoid preachers of untrue peace, nostalgic, and rather not political connoisseurs residing at the president’s office on the other hand would be busy sanctioning with slithering speed those apostates to the system.

They are doing well in their team. I am apathetically convinced watching those euphoric pragmatisms on South Sudan television.

But I would say, as many others may, that Salva’s amnesty is not doing any better for the country, but to those who responded to it. That tactics is an absolute verdure of everlasting insurgency.

With this sentiment, some people would be forced to accuse me of memory lost as they may cite the resolutions of the well known cases involving Dr. Riek Machar and Lam Akol, as well as the Gen. Matip Nhial and others using the same process. They may have a point perhaps, but was amnesty involved in those cases?

The reasons for my objection to the president’s tactics resided in the variation of how to eliminate an internal security such as insurgency.

Amnesty as a tool for peace talk and rewarding of the responders to such amnesty is sending a wrong message to not so altruistic individuals still in our system and may be enticed by the lure of ranks-rise and accompanying riches.

On the other hand, offering an amnesty without scrutinizing the cause of disagreement in the first place is a medieval strategy for peace process and in essence has few more problems in my view.

Apart from its failure to solve the core problem, its shows the obsolescence of peace proceedings or mechanism within the government, as well as allowing the country to be held hostage for incentives, such as the recent promotions of militants.

Some people may embrace it, but I don’t because it is unbalanced and contemptible.

How is it even possible in the real world for the president to promote a civilian with zero military training and the rank to a fully commissioned but untrained military general as it happens to David Yau Yau?

When did the crime of treason become of such admiration to be rewarded?

What people may cite in this case is peace. Hence the president can embark on such costly initiative to secure it. The question is do we have peace?

Peace might represent a state of tranquillity, and that calmness is what we all needed, but it turns out not be the case. We are in the state of chaos in Jonglei and around the country.

That may be not a president’s fault, but with such rewarding in rebellion, both in military promotions, and even a possibility of ministerial appointment as the rumor goes, I would argue that the president is doing peace itself and our people a great harm because the war-like insurgency has just begun and the president is the drum beater and the usher at the same time.

The obvious reasons for that would be clear. I am staging the rebellion in order to be promoted like others in order to enhance by chances of wealth, since military ranks are associated to that.

In normative theory, we the human beings are prone to self-seeking behavior. If we are given a chance to fulfil that instinct of self, we will and that is what the president has just unleashed.

If the supposed crime of treason can propel you from nothing to general, people may find it enticing and their behavior, including of those heroes serving in the SPLA, wouldn’t be constrained to the larger collective purposes of society.

One or more low ranking officers in our army hypothetically speaking or even an ambitious, self-centered civilian like Yau Yau might take up arms and inflict the grievous destruction to our people in order to be rewarded.

People will judge this assertion, but Salva’s promotion of those who took the lives of civilians in pursuing of their own ego is a total mocker to the system he leads, and to his own wisdom.

Pilfering in this case seems to be a grand crime than killing. To end this, knowing that our rulers are dreadfully reactive to criticisms, I wouldn’t be surprised if this piece doesn’t go down well with them or any other parasitic guzzlers riding the back of that antiquity, but who cares?

That wouldn’t stop me from calling the recent rushing of integration and promotion of rebels into the regular army without any meticulous scrutiny as a mindless suicidal act to the society in terms of security and resources.

But, surely it’s a political gain for the president under fire. Before those intrepid adorers of delinquency take it out of context, I would like to be clear.

I am not advocating for non-integration or waging the campaign against peace, but why all these rushing?

It may turn out in different ways, but I assume these political bonding instituted the rise of hypocrisy among opposite sides who just joined and the government itself.

For instance, Gen. Bapiny Monytuil and Johnson Uliny as well other colleagues of theirs, staging the war accusing Juba of harbouring the tribal politics, and hence its system was nepotist and immensely infested with corruption and other likes.

With them rushing back into the same system without an equitable change, the question they’re supposed to answer is what changes have you seen in the government, or is it just because of the riches of ranks and personnel benefit that are more enticing?

I am not going to speak for them, but I ultimately think their main intentions of waging war was integral to the quest of personality rather than collective, therefore are true egomaniacs.

This in essence, might also have some political tactics by the seemingly power-maniac president as the 2015 is not far away.

War and militancy-like insurgency would be inevitable and president will be ready to bribe them each time to bring them to his side.

This will ultimately create an army and political leadership depending on the presidency, thus allowing him to rule in perpetuity.

Marial Mach Aduot is a Deakin University graduate with degree in Politics, and Masters in International Relations, and current under training for Masters of Politics and Policy Studies. He can be reached for comments at

Treason charges & legal realities of Dec/15/2013 Coup d’état

BY: AJO N.J. KENYI, (Advocate) JUBA, FEB/03/2014, SSN;

On Tuesday January 28th, 2014, the government of the Republic of South Sudan through the minister of Justice, Paulino Wanawilla Unago slapped treason charges against seven of 13 senior politicians implicated in last year’s alleged coup attempt in the country’s capital, Juba, including former vice-president Dr. Gabriel Riek Machar Teny.

Four of the seven suspects are in custody which include Pagan Amum Okiech, former secretary-general of the ruling SPLM party, Oyai Deng Ajak, former minister for national security, Majak D’Agoot, former deputy minister of defence and Ezekiel Lol Gatkuoth, former South Sudanese ambassador to the United States, while three remain at large, Dr. Gabriel Riek Machar Teny, Taban Deng Gai and Alfred Lado Gore.

The report of the investigation that was released makes no mention of Rebecca Nyandeng, the widow of the Late Dr. John Garang De Mabior despite numerous avowals from the State of her involvement in the Coup, a fact I shall revert to later.

Treason charges:

Article 4(1) of the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan is to the effect that No person or group of persons shall take or retain control of State power except in accordance with the Constitution and any person or group of persons who attempt(s) to overthrow the constitutional government, or suspend or abrogate the Constitution commits treason, Article 4(2) of the Constitution.

It is important to understand that despite the constitutional mention of treason, it falls short of definition of what constitutes treason and the penal sanctions associated with it.

The charging section of the offence of treason is Section 64 of the Penal Code Act, No. 9 of 2008. Under Section 5 of the Penal Code Act, Treason is defined to mean an act of sedition, disloyalty, betrayal or subversion.

Sedition simply means organized incitement of rebellion or civil disorder against authority or State usually by speech or writing, it could also mean insurrection or rebellion meanwhile subversion means a systematic attempt to overthrow a government by working from within; undermining.

To make a sound understanding of the offence these senior individuals are charged with and the status of the released seven (7), it is only imperative to have an insight of the legal chronicle and comestibles.

It is important to note that under Section 44 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, No. 5 of 2008, no person shall be brought to trial on the offence of treason without a previous written sanction of the President or of the person whom he or she authorizes to give such sanction; provided that the President of the Supreme Court of Southern Sudan, by order, constitutes a Special Court for the trial of any person accused under the above-mentioned section of the Penal Code or any other Law.

This is explains why the investigation report is submitted to the President out of which he either sanctions their trial or order their release before trial.

As to whether they should be formally charged of the offence before the President can take the appropriate action or not, is a different matter which I have not addressed in my mind.

There are no established jurisdictive precedents to establish the line notwithstanding the muddle as to whether we are Common law or Civil law associated State.

Section 64(1) of the Penal Code Act is to the effect that, whoever being a citizen of or a resident in Southern Sudan —
(a) does any act, whether inside or outside Southern Sudan, with the intent of overthrowing the Government; or
(b) incites, conspires with or assists any other person to do any act, whether inside or outside Southern Sudan, with the intent of overthrowing the Government, commits the offence of treason, and upon conviction, shall be sentenced to death or to life imprisonment.

Under subsection 2 of section 64, it provides, without limiting the generality of subsection (1), above, the acts that constitute treason include:—

(a) preparing or endeavoring to carry out by force any enterprise which usurps the executive power of the President or the Government in any matter;
(b) in time of war or during a period of public emergency, doing anything which assists any other State to engage in hostile or belligerent action against Southern Sudan; or
(c) instigating any other State or foreign person to invade Southern Sudan.

Given the above narrative, the offence of treason is either committed when a person carries out an act to overthrow a government or also when such person(s) incites or conspires with or assist any other person to do the act whether within or without Republic of South Sudan.

This raises the issue as to whether the released seven detainees who were said to fall in group “B” as categorized by the Minister of Justice did not commit the offence of treason.

However it is worth noting that the Minister of Justice under Section 25 of the Code of Criminal procedure Act no. 5 of 2008 is empowered to stay proceedings on any reasonable grounds after investigation but before trial.

The reasonable ground can be lack of evidence in the legal sense if politics is divorced of the current attaining circumstances.

If they, the released detainees as the Minister of Justice stated did plan to “mobilize the public to bring down the democratically elected government”, then they too committed the offence of treason as provided under Section 64(1) (b) of the Penal Code Act by way of inciting, conspiring with or assisting those still in detention and at large in carrying out the overt act of a coup d’état.

However this can only take root when the offence of treason is confirmed to have been committed by the principals beyond reasonable doubt.

Therefore, in the interim the release of the seven (7) detainees and the continued detention of the four others can only be perceived as part of the political gimmicks being played by the parties of the day than the reality of the coup d’état.

It is important to note that the proof of an offence of treason is not a leisurely stroll in a garden park.

The burden of proof lies with the State as provided under section 109 of the Code of Evidence Act No.2 of 2006 as it is the party alleging the fact of the thwarted attempted coup d’état.

Just like the old saying goes; he who alleges must prove. As held in Bhatt v R [1957] EA 332, “A mere scintilla of evidence can never be enough, nor can any amount of worthless discredited evidence” suffice to put an accused on defence.

On the matter of utterances made on by the accused persons before the December 15th, 2013, for instance during the press conference in SPLM House on the December 6th, 2013, in a case of treason the utterances of an accused at a meeting are key to the overt act.

The crime lies in the words. Mere presence is of no evidential value to the act of attendance.

As was held in the old East African case of Githea v R [1956] 23 EACA 440, “Treason lay in what was said at the meeting and not the meeting themselves.”

Incidences of Constitutional Transgressions

The Bail issue:
Article 19(4) of the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan provides that, a person arrested by the police as part of an investigation, may be held in detention, for a period not exceeding 24 hours and if not released on bond to be produced in court.

The court has authority to either remand the accused in prison or to release him or her on bail. The authority to release an individual on bail is purely a court’s jurisdictional matter if the individual desires bail and if not remanded in prison.

A person can be released on bail if he personally executes a bond to appear, with or without securities or sureties or by another person executing a bail, to bring the arrested person, with or without securities and/or by paying a deposit coupled with bond, or bail.

Upon the fulfilment of the requirement of the bail, an arrested person shall be released from custody, Section 124 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 2008 however under Section 127 (1) of the same Act; a person accused of an offence punishable with death shall not be released on bail.

The offence of treason carries the Maximum penalty of death or life imprisonment as per section 64(1) of the Penal Code Act.

Therefore, to talk of bail for the released seven accused person was unfounded in law of the land.

However, there are exceptional circumstances under which a person charged with an offence that carries a penalty of more than ten years imprisonment to be released on bail as provided under Section 127(2) of the Penalty Code Act.

But important to emphasize that, no bail for a person charged with an offence that carries the maximum penalty of the death sentence as per Section 127(1) of the Penal Code Act, 2008.

Notwithstanding the above assertion, the continuous detention of the remaining four without charge or being remanded to a prison for more than 24 hours is a violation of constitution.

Madam Rebecca Nyandeng issue:

It is on record that the State maintains that the widow of the late Dr. John Garang was part of the coup plot. However the President asserts that she is not being arrested for reasons known to him and every day, the government assures the world of the desire to uphold the Constitution in respect of the detainees.

Article 14 of the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, provides for equality before the law and it is to the effect that; all persons are equal before the law and are entitled to the equal protection of the law without discrimination as to race, ethnic origin, colour, sex, language, religious creed, political opinion, birth, locality or social status.

Therefore, if Madam Rebecca is not being arrested because of her status as widow of Late Leader; this is a serious Constitutional breach that surges the principle of equality before the law.

In a conclusive remark, this article is to give a brief legal insight to the public on the current unfolding matters.

Ajo Noel Julious Kenyi; The Author is an Advocate of the Republic of South Sudan based in Juba. He is also a holder of an award of Academic Excellence from the Attorney General of the Republic of Uganda.
Can be reached on